theyarecomingforyou wrote on Nov 14, 2012, 01:26:Yeah, that's all I was talking about - they appear in the Windows Store but they're not actually distributed through it. I'm not sure if you can actually buy x86-64 apps through the Windows Store though and even if you can there would be the 30% cut that Microsoft takes, so it's a disaster every way you look at it.

You can't buy them through the store. Microsoft is treating desktop apps as second class citizens and will do everything they can emphasize Metro apps and marginalize desktop apps precisely because they don't get 30%. Those are likely the real reasons. Either way, desktop apps and developers are not being treated equally and this is just the beginning of this new platform.

People wrongly take it for granted that the openness of the Win32/desktop will always be there. They also take functionality for granted, I doubt many people who seem to speak about Windows 8 in comical vagueness or simply to be contrary have really read the restrictions placed on WinRT apps. Some things we use now are simply not possible in WinRT without significant compromise and background processes are practically undoable. People say its alarmist to consider the long term prospects but it's just smart and prudent, there is plenty of precedent to consider. It's not even "long term" really, Microsoft wants to adopt more rapid releases instead of these multi-year gaps.

I hope Microsoft remembers their platform was built on compatibility, customization and choice.

See, this is a giant Verno double standard.In some threads he complains that Microsoft is trying to force everyone to use the store and end side loading altogether.In this thread he's complaining that they don't put desktop apps in the store.

Verno, there are a few reasons for this, none of which are "second class citizen":1) No one wants desktop apps in the store. Vendors don't particularly want it. Consumers don't particularly want it. There are other, better ways to get these apps2) Microsoft really doesn't want these in the store, not because they don't want to sell them, or don't want you using them, but because they don't want people to start panicking and making stupid "Microsoft is ending side-loading!" posts, the kind that were all over this board

Microsoft does not, does not, absolutely does not want to end side loading. They do not want to end desktop apps. What they want is to provide a walled-in ecosystem, where everything is certified and in one place, for all the consumers out there that prefer this. This is a tablet concept, and the store is based around tablet ideas.They also want to keep the desktop piece going strong, as it's their bread and butter. To do this they are keeping these out of the store, as they do not belong there, and continuing to allow side loading.

They are literally giving you your cake and letting you eat it to. You have the best of both worlds. Still you complain. I get that almost everyone has genuine gripes about Microsoft, and Windows 8 in particular, but Verno, you tend to hop into every Microsoft thread and go "lol, Windows Phone!" and leave, or you make a complaint and when someone moots your complaint you find another, the equivalent of "this thing is too bland and boring" "but Verno, that's why the make it in multiple colors," "multiple colors are garish and ruining the brand!"

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Nov 14, 2012, 01:26:Yeah, that's all I was talking about - they appear in the Windows Store but they're not actually distributed through it. I'm not sure if you can actually buy x86-64 apps through the Windows Store though and even if you can there would be the 30% cut that Microsoft takes, so it's a disaster every way you look at it.

You can't buy them through the store. Microsoft is treating desktop apps as second class citizens and will do everything they can emphasize Metro apps and marginalize desktop apps precisely because they don't get 30%. Those are likely the real reasons. Either way, desktop apps and developers are not being treated equally and this is just the beginning of this new platform.

People wrongly take it for granted that the openness of the Win32/desktop will always be there. They also take functionality for granted, I doubt many people who seem to speak about Windows 8 in comical vagueness or simply to be contrary have really read the restrictions placed on WinRT apps. Some things we use now are simply not possible in WinRT without significant compromise and background processes are practically undoable. People say its alarmist to consider the long term prospects but it's just smart and prudent, there is plenty of precedent to consider. It's not even "long term" really, Microsoft wants to adopt more rapid releases instead of these multi-year gaps.

I hope Microsoft remembers their platform was built on compatibility, customization and choice. A firm commitment to the desktop instead of a grudging acceptance of legacy concerns would be nice and treating them equally in the store would partially send that message IMHO.

Verno wrote on Nov 13, 2012, 17:15:I don't believe thats the case for anyone except Microsoft. According to the store guidelines you can only have a desktop app in the form of a website link and you still need to pass the Windows App cert.

Yeah, that's all I was talking about - they appear in the Windows Store but they're not actually distributed through it. I'm not sure if you can actually buy x86-64 apps through the Windows Store though and even if you can there would be the 30% cut that Microsoft takes, so it's a disaster every way you look at it.

Beamer wrote on Nov 13, 2012, 15:46:Plenty of people buy the iPad expecting a laptop replacement, too. Idiots. But Microsoft was particularly bad in explaining what RT was.

In general, Tablets can't replace Desktops for productivity. There are even some cases where laptops can't either (due to horsepower... engineering CAD workstations come to mind)

Surfing the Internet, doing some quick e-mails, getting some light entertainment (videos, mobile games, etc.) - Tablets do a fair job of replacing a laptop. Great for the airplane, and hotel rooms on family trips. Or just looking up stuff, while on your couch at home watching TV.

But full on business productivity? Perhaps if the business had a ton of custom apps and their own app store (which is how we manage IOS devices in our enterprise with Mas 360)... but that's a heavy investment in custom apps (which we don't have yet)... and that's still not the same productivity as office on a laptop. By the time one adds a bluetooth or attachable keyboard... one might as well have bought a laptop (Or an ultrabook).

Yup, I hear from people all the time who get tablet envy then end up using 2 or 3 other devices to supplement their expensive tablet. Most people end up needing to do enough odd things that a tablet can't do and end up back at their computer. A smartphone is almost better because at least it has more overall utility.

Steele Johnson wrote on Nov 13, 2012, 13:31:This guy did a great job! I think Windows 8 is definitely the right direction for MS. They now have one over on the competition; 1 OS for all platforms. That is generally the only way for MS to pick up the pace and catch up to Apple and Google. I've got Windows 8 installed at work and absolutely love it! Sure, the UI takes a bit to get used to (because it's new), but the underlying management of resources, etc, etc, is so much better than previous versions.

And complaining about a missing button just shows how ignorant you are and how easily confused by new technology. Go back in your cave.

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Nov 13, 2012, 17:02:As for desktop apps, they ARE actually allowed on the store.

I don't believe thats the case for anyone except Microsoft. According to the store guidelines you can only have a desktop app in the form of a website link and you still need to pass the Windows App cert. For example I see some stuff up there like O&O Defrag but the only way to obtain it is by following the store entry to the dev website. They won't distro any desktop apps which means casual users are going to be a lot less likely to follow through (probably part of the idea). I mentioned this a MS guy at our office once and he said that it was due to device restrictions but it would be trivial for them to detect and display specific apps/info based on the viewing device. They even do it already with 32 and 64 bit links on the store ironically.

I understand their reluctance to accidentally distribute malware or something but they run that risk regardless (happened to both Android and iOS even).

@Verno: Most of the points you raise are valid. Metro apps handle multi-monitors terribly and it was clearly a last minute implementation. Requiring Metro apps to be distributed through the Windows Store is both unnecessary and anti-competitive. Boot to desktop should be an option - in fact it should be default with mouse & keyboard setups.

As for desktop apps, they ARE actually allowed on the store. The trouble is that Microsoft takes a 30% cut of the sale, so you're not going to have Adobe putting up their Creative Suite software any time soon.

As for the Surface RT, it's WAY overpriced and a lot of people will assume that it runs x86-64 applications. Even the Pro version is behind the likes of the Nexus 10 and it will be dramatically more expensive. It was never intended to be a serious product - it was simply designed to show that Windows 8 runs on tablets. In that respect it did what it set out to.

I remember this ad with Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld, and I think they were... buying shoes? Buying groceries? Fisting a hooker? And that somehow was supposed to convince me to buy... Windows? A new car? Stock in the Arab slave market?

Beamer wrote on Nov 13, 2012, 15:46:Plenty of people buy the iPad expecting a laptop replacement, too. Idiots. But Microsoft was particularly bad in explaining what RT was.

In general, Tablets can't replace Desktops for productivity. There are even some cases where laptops can't either (due to horsepower... engineering CAD workstations come to mind)

Surfing the Internet, doing some quick e-mails, getting some light entertainment (videos, mobile games, etc.) - Tablets do a fair job of replacing a laptop. Great for the airplane, and hotel rooms on family trips. Or just looking up stuff, while on your couch at home watching TV.

But full on business productivity? Perhaps if the business had a ton of custom apps and their own app store (which is how we manage IOS devices in our enterprise with Mas 360)... but that's a heavy investment in custom apps (which we don't have yet)... and that's still not the same productivity as office on a laptop. By the time one adds a bluetooth or attachable keyboard... one might as well have bought a laptop (Or an ultrabook).

My boss bought an MS Surface last week and tasked me with setting it up so that he can get rid of his laptop (told him not to buy it).

That kind of stuff just makes me laugh. And I've heard similar comments ("we can replace laptops!") from people at my job, too.

I guess marketing is doing it's job...

Marketing NOT doing its job. Its job is to not only get customers but get happy customers. Anyone looking to buy a laptop replacement in the RT will not be a happy customer. They'll complain, there will be bad word of mouth, and sales will collapse. Bad, bad marketing.

Plenty of people buy the iPad expecting a laptop replacement, too. Idiots. But Microsoft was particularly bad in explaining what RT was.

I don't think its that apparent, it's stated in a fine print kind of way going by the website and the marketing I've seen. Most desktop users don't even understand the difference which is why Surface RT was always kind of a silly proposition. The price tag is a bit baffling too, Surface Pro could easily be $1k+.

"but I can click the desktop right here, why won't it run desktop stuff?!" have fun explaining it.

I think eventually the third parties will come up with something better at a reasonable price. That combined with some refinements to Metro could mean some real competition with traditional laptops.

wtf_man wrote on Nov 13, 2012, 15:07:A co-worker of mine has a Windows Phone (It's 7.5 but still has the fugly tile interface). I don't see the appeal at all, after messing with it for a while. I guess that is just personal preference. I'll stick to my iPhone, and go Andriod if Apple ends up pissing me off.

My boss bought an MS Surface last week and tasked me with setting it up so that he can get rid of his laptop (told him not to buy it). After messing with it and the version of 8 it ships with for a few days now I can safely say no sir, I don't like it.

avianflu wrote on Nov 13, 2012, 14:31:the metro interface should exist only on portable touch-screen devices.

It really is that simple.

A co-worker of mine has a Windows Phone (It's 7.5 but still has the fugly tile interface). I don't see the appeal at all, after messing with it for a while. I guess that is just personal preference. I'll stick to my iPhone, and go Andriod if Apple ends up pissing me off.

That said... with MS trying to compete in that market (and being late to the game, as usual) I agree that they need to keep that crap off the dekstop and stick with what they're good at for that platform. With the alleged "PC is dying" banter... it's almost like MS is trying to boost the speed at which they become irrelevant.

avianflu wrote on Nov 13, 2012, 14:31:the metro interface should exist only on portable touch-screen devices.

It really is that simple.

I could see Metro being useful for multi-monitor situations but not in its current implementation. They really need to rethink hot corners too. Learning 10 new keyboard shortcuts is not a substitute for sensible design.

This surprises me. The store is pretty clearly for Metro only, in part to avoid all the talk of "MSFT will end side-loading!" There's been plenty of fear-mongering here about that, but if it wasn't Metro-only that would have been even more out of control.

I'll agree with everything else you're saying. The poor reaction to the multi-monitor is the main reason I haven't tried it out, and everything else you're mentioning is pretty valid complaint. They clearly shoe-horned the Tablet side to try to jumpstart the ecosystem, at the expense of the desktop experience.